About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
CSPAN2 9
CSPAN 8
WHUT (Howard University Television) 8
MSNBC 5
MSNBCW 5
KQED (PBS) 4
WETA 4
CNN 3
CNNW 3
KRCB (PBS) 2
WMPT (PBS) 1
LANGUAGE
English 62
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 62 (some duplicates have been removed)
senator from a red state, a decorated and wounded combat veteran nominated to lead the pentagon while we are at war. republicans have never before felt the need to filibuster a cabinet member in the history of the country but apparently now this is the time and this is the guy worth waiting 224 years to spring it on. it has never happened before, but why not now? heck. the white house is not pleased. "today's action runs against both the majority will of the senate and our nation's interest. this waste of time is not without consequence. we have 66,000 men and women deployed in afghanistan, and we need our new secretary of defense to be a part of significant decisions about how we bring that war to a responsible end. next week in brussels, the united states will meet with our allies to talk about the transition in afghanistan at the nato defense ministerial, and our next secretary of defense should be there. for the sake of national security, it's time to stop playing politics with our department of defense and to move beyond the distractions and delay. allow this war hero an up or down
. yorktown, appomattox, the pentagon where 9/11 occurred -- there is a ceremony tonight i will be commissioned in -- there is a commission in april. we care very deeply about these events. one in nine virginians birth to death is a veteran. when you add in the guard and reserve and contractors, now you are probably talking about one in three of us. we care very deeply about all that is within dod. let me be plain, the threat that virginians and others are talking about now more than ever is the inability of congress to find a way forward on a reasonable budget compromise. that is what is in the newspapers and the headlines. at the direction of the deputy director, dod is planning for future cuts. i am very worried at the macro level about dod's ability to pursue and execute appropriate national security objectives in this time of congressional inability to find a budget compromise. the current cr limits flexibility, for example, of the military to appropriately taylor resources, we have no flexibility to deal with a shortfall. and to me, it seems like funding the military
are to buy the pentagon didn't show you any video of things that miss. that is bad pr. and the percentage of weapons that were smart weapons in the first gulf war but infinitely more than anything the iraqis had was remarkably small compared to the impression the pentagon gave them a military briefing for the alicia pictures of smart bombs and smart missiles and things fly into windows. that was the percentage actually expended. so i don't think this is a revolution in military affairs so much as a vivid demonstration of just how proficient the united states was in waging war, especially can do this proficient adversary. but it also is a military affairs in a fundamentalist about is the car still has a boat here and the ultimate goal of the conflict was a political goal and therefore the military plan made that involve smart and weapons were designed with a traditional military conclusion, which in truth is not revolutionary at all, getting the enemy to do what she wanted. i can't see it as fares. and getting assigned from the back right of time, but i do want to give -- >> yet, let randy
reasons, the pentagon have made their own case to the president. with the new resource problem home -- problem in mali. look what it took to support french forces against al qaeda subcontractors. if we can't do that, when americans are held hostage and killed, what kind of response do you really expect for -- >> is that a consequence of the u.s. not getting involved in mali earlier? >> what is the implication from that? that we need to be involved -- >> we were concerned about molly for at least eight months. only now there is discussion about what we should -- >> have another discussion on benghazi for the thousandth time. >> we are in the in danger -- in no danger of intervening too much. that is not what we have to worry about. >> let's move on. if you have a question, raise your hands and identify yourself. keep your questions short. let's go to -- then this woman right here in the black. >> as joshua said, syria is part of a broader middle east. what would be the position of the u.s. when lebanon, jordan, maybe israel and the whole region would be unstable? should the u.s. the
that came out recently. it did suggest the pentagon is pushing the pentagon that would only keep 8000 troops in afghanistan. i know that general austin, you weren't a part of the process so far, but can you support a plan that was scheduled withdraws troops in advance? you know, we're looking at withdraws troops in afghanistan and according to this article from a passing down to 1000 within a short period of time, i have questions if we can even maintain our mission, let alone complete the mission. how can you make decisions on troop withdraw when sec previously, so much depends on the ground, what the government is doing, what variability eyes up to that point. how would you approach a proposal like that? >> i certainly would first really work hard to make sure i fully understood with the leadership wanted to get done moving into the future. certainly my advice is the commander on the ground or commander central command would provide my advice based upon breaking the security forces are and the conditions in theater and what i think we need to do to move forward to make sure we maintain the
effective in dealing inside the pentagon? >> i would worry about a congress being jammed to support a nominee that the "washington post" is said to the left of obama policy agenda and on the fringe of the senate. >> heather: joining me now is brad blakeman and erlina maxwell i'll start with you. it does appear that chuck hagel will be confirmed as secretary of defense. will this delay his performance during his confirmation hearing make him a less effective or respected secretary of defense? >> process isn't over and the delay is a caused by hagel himself. additional information was needed in his testimony. the senators have a right to review that material and use that in their judgment. assuming he is confirmed, certainly his performance before the senate was not of the caliber as anybody would thought as somebody seeking the department of defense. it was not where it should have been. he knows that. certainly the white house knows that. having said that, i think the jury out. they are going to be looking to see when she confirmed as to whether he is up for the job. really the burd
cuts scheduled to take effect march 1. half the cuts are from the pentagon. we will discuss that with ray locker. and a conversation about the use of lethal force against suspected terrorists. then we will talk about the 22 anniversary of the family and medical leave act. washington journal, live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. tonight, former president bill clinton speaks to a gathering of house democrats. new secretary of state john kerry meets with the canadian foreign minister. then a military farewell for leon panetta. senator ben cardin talks to employees at the national institutes of health. >> first lady helen taft on discussing politics. >> i had always had the satisfaction of knowing almost as much he about the politics and intricacies of any situation. i think any woman can discuss with her husband topics of national interest. i became familiar with more than politics. >> helen taft, whose husband, william howard taft, was the only man to serve as president and supreme court justice. c-span is new original series, first ladies, image and influence. produced with t
is confirmed and sworn in." close quote. so if anybody's under any misapprehension, i believe the pentagon press secretary has made that clear, we have a secretary of defense. he has not resigned, and he will continue to serve until such time as his successor is sworn in. and i would just say again to my friend, the senator from illinois, the assistant majority leader, we all know what a filibuster is. a filibuster is designed to kill a nomination or to defeat legislation, as the senator from tennessee said. and i would say this is equivalent to what happened back in 2005, and i have a letter here, mr. president, i'd like to ask unanimous consent to be made part of the record following my remarks. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: and i will refer to it. this is a letter signed by chris dodd, our former colleague who served on the foreign relations committee, and joe biden when he was the ranking member of the foreign relations committee back in 2005. it's entitled "dear democratic colleague, we write to urge you to oppose the cloture on the bolton nomination tonight. w
to continue on the washington post article that came all recently. it did suggest that the pentagon is pushing a plan that would keep only 8000 troops in afghanistan. general austin, can you support a plan that was scheduled withdrawal of troops in advance? we are looking at the withdrawal of troops in afghanistan. according to this article, from 8000 to about 1000 in a short period and of time. i have questions if we can even maintain our mission, let alone complete the mission. how can you make decisions on troop withdrawal when, as you stated previously, so much depends on troops on the ground, what the government is doing, what their abilities are at that point. how would you approach a proposal like that? >> i would really work hard to make sure i fully understood what to the leadership wanted to get done moving into the future. my advice as a commander on the ground or a commander of central command -- i would provide my advice to them based upon where i think the security forces are , the conditions in the theater, and what i think we need to do to move full word to make sure we maintai
get it worse? i worked in the pentagon. it would have made it a lot better. so we realized you really have to go after the people who do the work, people who do logistics, communications, pass information, do car bombs, you have to take those out. we came up with a strategy, philadelphia would love this. it is like rocky balboa and apollo creed. we'll hit them in the midsection and hit them a lot. from august of 2004 when we did 18 raids, two years, later, same month, same force, same fight, we were doing 300 raids a month. that was ten a night. now, if you stop and you say, well, ten a night, that's a lot, that's impressive. that means every raid guy on the force is going on a raid at least one raid every night. every pilot's flying one or 2:00 raids every night. and these raids are not patrols. this is not with foot, these are going in the door, somebody is getting shot. extraordinary, and to do that though you can't use previous systems. one you've got to be able to bring in this intelligence on an industrial scale. you have got to be able -- we got to the point where instead of th
effect. the pentagon needs a seasoned leader to diplomat these cuts, cuts for which an overwhelmingly majority of republicans in congress voted. the so-called sequester, mr. president, was supported by 174 republicans in the house of representatives, 28 republicans here in the senate, 60% and 75% of the two republican bodies in this country. we have a balanced proposal to replace those across-the-board cuts for this year with smart spending reductions which must continue, a measure to close corporate tax loopholes and wasteful subsidies. and revenue from the wealthiest among us, americans making millions of dollars each year. it's critical that the republicans and democrats come together to find a balanced way to avert these drastic cuts. the consequence of the so-called sequester cuts are real not only for national defense but for millions of american families and businesses alike. three-quarters of a million jobs, 750,000 jobs, mr. president, are at stake. across the country tens of thousands of teachers, including thousands of workers with disabled children would be laid off. 70,00
. as is widely recognized, sequestration over the next 10 years apply to the pentagon budget would only reduce it in inflation adjusted terms to what it was in 2007 a. the most powerful military in the world -- 2007, as the most powerful military in the world engaged in a war in iraq and the challenge in afghanistan. if members of congress pay attention to the facts, they will see a clear path to dramatically reduce pentagon spending without undermining america's position as being the most powerful nation on the planet. and nobody has done a better job of highlighting a path forward, an area of opportunity, than walter pinkus writhing on the pages of the "washington post" over the last couple years as he details the sweep of our nuclear weapons program and the spending trajectory. this morning's latest offering should be required reading for every member of congress and the ones who whine the loutest should be forced to read it -- loudest should be forced to read it twice. he details a vast array of nuclear weapons already deployed, ready to be deployed within 30 minutes, a relic of our conten
the pentagon press corps for an award called the distinguished medal. he also addressed north korea's's nuclear program and the troops withdraw and afghanistan and sequestration. >> as you know, this is i believe my final press conference here at the pentagon briefing room. there are moments when i thought it was the last act of an italian opera. i'm not sure exactly when it would end and the fat lady would sing. but i think that the congress will act and they will confirm chuck hagel this week. so what i wanted to do is to use this opportunity to first of all thank you all, all of you that are part of the press corps here and the press in general. throughout my 50 years in public service, i have always believed very deeply in the role of the press. because i believe deeply in the role of the american people in our democracy, the information is the key to an informed electorate. while we may or may not agree with every story in the grand scheme of things, because of the work of the press i believe the truth always comes out. and in the end, we cannot really serve the american people well unless
stopper in all of this, wolf. >> thank you very much, barbara starr at pentagon. >>> up next here in "the situation room," a feud involving the actor alec baldwin and a new york post photographer. there's different versions about what happened. that's coming up next. the ones with the strong shoulder to lean on, the ones we're named after, and the ones named after us. it takes all kinds of good to make a family. at new york life, everything we do is to help you keep good going. music: "make someone happy" music: "make someone happy" ♪it's so important to make someone happy.♪ it's so important to make meone happy.♪ ♪make just one someone happy ♪and you will be happy too. then you're going to love this. right now they're only $14.95! wow-a grt deal just got a whole lot better. hurry. $14.95 won't last. >>> here's a look at this hour's hot shots. in new york, thousands line the streets to mark the year of the snake at the festival last sunday. >>> in bali, a beautiful sunset over the water. >>> in california, paragliders come in for a landing over the beach. send in your photos to
defending former republican senator chuck hagel saying that he will be an excellent pentagon chief. now, this comes after a fiery confirmation hearing with members of the senate armed services committee. he faced some tough questions including this one from senator james imhoff. >> why do you think the rainan foreign ministry strongly supports your nomination to be the secretary of defense? >> i have a difficult enough time with american politics senator. i have no idea, but thank you. >> senators could vote as early as this week. washington times columnist charlie hurt joins us to weigh in on whether we can expect senator hagel to be cob confirmed as defense secretary. >>> the reverend jesse jackson is leading a march today in honor of a chicago teenager killed this week. the 15-year-old high school band member gunned down days after attending the president's inauguration. just the latest victim in a city where there are 515 murders last year alone. more than 100 shooting incidents have occurred since january 1. reverend jackson called on president obama to come to his home town of chi
and the president's nominee for pentagon chief gets the third degree. >> i actually would like an answer, yes or no. # >> well, i'm not going to give you a yes or no. >> outstanding defense secretary leon panetta and joint chief chairman general martin dempsey on the hagel hearings, world hot spots and benghazi. >> this is not 911. you can't call in two minutes and expect a team in place. >> then the president's agenda. >> comprehensive immigration reform. prevent something like newtown or oak creek from happening again. >> what about jobs? with former obama policy adviser mellody barnes, former labor secretary elaine chao and a conversation about football and kids with the mvp of super bowl xl hines ward. i'm candy crowley. this is "state of the union." joining me now leon panetta secretary of defense and martin dempsey, chairman of the chief joint of staff. gentlemen, thank you both for being here. we had very interesting hearings on thursday for your replacement. i want to play you just a little bit from those hearings. >> the iranian's red line, persian gulf, some of the iranian questions you a
, a suicide bomber of the u.s. embassy in turkey and the president's nominee for pentagon chief gets the third degree. >> i would like an answer yes or no. >> well, i'm not going to give you a yes or no. >> outstanding defense secretary leon panetta and joint chief chairman martin dempsey on the hagel hearings, hospitals and benghazi. >> this is not 911. you can't call in two minutes and expect a team in place. >> then the president's agenda. >> comprehensive immigration reform. prevent something like newtown hopefully from happening again. >> what about jobs? with former obama policy adviser meld barnes, former labor secretary elaine chao, mvp super bowl xl hines ward. i'm candy crowley and this is "state of the union." joining me now leon panetta secretary of defense and martin dempsey, chairman of the chief joint of staff. i want to play you a little of the hearings. >> as to the iranians red line persian gulf, some of the iranian questions you asked. i support the president's strong position on containment. by the way, i've just been handed a note that i misspoke. we don't have a position
,000 dead americans, the trade towers are taken out, the pentagon's been hit. if it hadn't been for the folks on 93 they'd have taken out the white house or the capitol on washington, d.c. worst attack in our history. worse than pearl harbor by far. and it was our job to make certain it didn't happen again. we were concerned for a couple of rps, partly because the expectation was there would be a follow on attack, nearly everybody believed it. but we also received intelligence that al qaeda was trying to get their hands on deadlier weapons. >> rose: do you regret nothing about the aftermath in terms of how we -- >> regarding 9/11? >> rose: everything that we did and that you were and the president were at the center of the response to 9/11. look back and say "we regret nothing"? >> that's my view. >> rose: none? >> correct. >> rose: you know this has been debated, too. >> sure. >> rose: were we prepared for the consequences after saddam was overthrown? >> well, that was the second proposition. you asked me about the aftermath of 9/11, the policies we put in place here. i would s
the pentagon and military posts have strong seasoned leadership teams. regardless of having the secretary or not having one is a portent concern. -- a point of concern. you have a good strong team that will be able to manage through this process. they have seen this coming. as you would expect the military to do, they are prepared. host: new hampshire, and the pennant caller -- caller: morning and thank you. i am so tired of the irresponsibility of the republicans. the chuck hagel thing is preposterous. how does it serve the nation to delay the president's choice? it is the first time in history that a filibuster has been used against a cabinet the sequester is the height of irresponsibility. why risk a potential double dip recession just so you can score political points? finally, you criticized the president for being out of washington and yet, -- that was and finally -- hear you are supporting a filibuster and finally, though you partly answer the question or just now, what your district and tails are large installations, i assume, other than fort campbell in your district. my brother
critical american infrastructure the pentagon is planning a range of defensive measures including a massive expansion of its own signer security force. joining me to discuss the developing background is david sanger of the "new york times." he cowrote today's front page story on the subject. joining us later is dune lawrence of bloomberg businessweek if and michael riley of bloomberg. they are learning everything they could. >> so far it's clear they've been into those systems it's not clear they've ever done anything to them. >> rose: why -- >> that's the remarkable question charlie. always the issue is intent and the degree to which the political leadership in china actually is knowledgeable about this and to what degree of control it has over it. because chinese command and control is not always what we image it from afar. in this case, unit 61398 which is the major cyber intelligence unit for the pla but not their own cyber operation. sort of their equivalent of the national security agency or our cyber command which is located at the national security agency in fort mead. >> rose: c
there starts to end. the headline news out of brussels today was a very terse statement from the pentagon spokesman. it was kind of strange. he was essentially clarifying, hey, whatever you heard from the germans earlier today, that was not true. this is the statement. the reports that the u.s. told allies that we are considering 8,000 to 12,000 u.s. troops after 2014 are not correct. a range of 8,000 to 12,000 troops was discussed, but it was discussed as the possible size of the overall nato mission, not the u.s. contribution. ah, important clarification. so the defense minister from germany had apparently told reporters that 8 to 12,000 troops was how many troops america was going to keep in afghanistan. everybody thought that was very big news since that's not what we heard hear at home at all. maybe that is how the german guy understood it, but it is apparently not the way that leon panetta meant it. that was the headline out of brussels today. those troops, that's nato combined, that's not just us. that was the headline. the other news of course was that representing the united stat
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 62 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)